CA5: Decision to use SRT to execute search warrant was not shown to be unreasonable on the totality

“Based on the totality of the circumstances, Officer Vinson’s decision to deploy the SRT to execute the search warrant for Ms. Bullock’s residence did not constitute force excessive to the need, nor was it objectively unreasonable.” Bailey v. Lawson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10813 (5th Cir. June 23, 2015).

Defendant consented to removing drugs hidden in her vagina. Concealing drugs in one’s vagina is not evidence tampering [¶s 36-39]. State v. Crocker, 2015-Ohio-2528, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 2409 (4th Dist. June 16, 2015).*

One officer’s trial testimony that another officer said that he was searching the back seat area of a car because of furtive movements was not hearsay. [I don’t get it: the court just makes this one up]. State v. Moore, 2015-Ohio-2466, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 2368 (12th Dist. June 22, 2015).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Excessive force, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.